Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author
Re: Should _long_options be considered dangerous?
- X-seq: zsh-workers 5852
- From: Sven Wischnowsky <wischnow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: zsh-workers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: Should _long_options be considered dangerous?
- Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1999 09:04:29 +0100 (MET)
- In-reply-to: Bart Schaefer's message of Wed, 17 Mar 1999 23:04:04 -0800 (PST)
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
Bart Schaefer wrote:
> I wonder if perhaps we shouldn't add some more warning text in
> Completion/Base/_long_options (and maybe even in Completion/README)
> noting that you shouldn't attempt to use _long_options from _normal
> or any other "default" completion function.
>
> Some (non-GNU) commands might actually do something unpleasant when
> run with an unrecognized --help option. I can't think of an example
> offhand, which is why the Subject is a question, but ...
Yes, I've been wondering if we should do that, too...
Bye
Sven
--- oc/README Mon Mar 15 10:08:53 1999
+++ Completion/README Thu Mar 18 09:01:05 1999
@@ -74,7 +74,10 @@
This handles options beginning with `--', as in many GNU commands.
The command must accept the --help option to list the possible options.
__long_options can also take arguments to help it decide what to
- complete as the value of the option.
+ complete as the value of the option. Note that this is potentially
+ dangerous because the command from the line will be called with the
+ --help option and hence could cause damage if used with a command
+ that does not support it.
_match_pattern
_match_test
These are used by Base/_path_files (and hence also Base/_files)
--- oc/Base/_long_options Tue Mar 16 11:49:55 1999
+++ Completion/Base/_long_options Thu Mar 18 09:03:19 1999
@@ -2,9 +2,12 @@
# This function tries to automatically complete long option names. For
# this it invokes the command from the line with the `--help' option
-# and then parses the output to find possible option names. For
-# options that get an argument after a `=', the function also tries to
-# automatically find out what should be complete as the argument.
+# and then parses the output to find possible option names, so you
+# should be careful to make sure that this function is not called for
+# a command that does not support this option.
+#
+# For options that get an argument after a `=', the function also tries
+# to automatically find out what should be complete as the argument.
# The possible completions for option-arguments can be described with
# the arguments to this function. This is done by giving pairs of
# patterns and actions as consecutive arguments. The actions specify
--
Sven Wischnowsky wischnow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author